Wentworth Miller, Prison Break star, comes out in protest against Russian LGBT laws

Wentworth Miller, jail Break star, comes come in protest                                 against Russian LGBT laws

Wentworth Miller, jail Break star, comes are available protest against Russian LGBT laws
Actor and film writer Wentworth Miller turned down letter of invitation to appear as guest of honour at the St siege International festival, explaining that "as a homosexual, i need to decline."
Miller, who is 41, is best notable for playing leading role michael Scofield in TV series jail Break. His 1st book, Stoker, was free earlier this year, stellar Mia Wasikowska and Nicole Kidman.
He wrote to the pageant director Maria Averbakh. The letter was announce on the website of GLAAD, a bunch that monitors media illustration of gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender people and problems and of that Miller is a member.
Miller continued:
"I am deeply troubled by the present perspective toward and treatment of gay men and ladies by the Russian government. the situation is in no manner acceptable, and that i cannot in sensible conscience participate in an exceedingly function occasion hosted by a rustic wherever people like myself area unit being systematically denied their basic right to live and love brazenly.
Related Articles
Reporter kicked off TV for complaining  Russia anti-gay laws twenty one Gregorian calendar month 2013
'It’s a weird love triangle between a mother, associate degree uncle and a daughter...' 01 Mar 2013
Stoker, review twenty eight Gregorian calendar month 2013
Perhaps, when and if circumstances improve, i'll be liberated to build a distinct alternative."
A voice for the cluster, Wilson Cruz, commented that Miller's "bold show of support sentds a strong message to LGBT Russians, World Health Organization are facing extreme violence and persecution: you're not alone."

Miller's refusal arrives once Andy Cohen, american TV presenter, declared he would not be co-hosting Miss Universe in capital of the Russian Federation this year as a result of "he did not feel right as a homosexual stepping foot into Russia."

James Forcillo Murder Charge: Sammy Yatim Shooting Prompts Second-Degree Murder Charge

TORONTO - A Toronto police officer is facing a rare murder charge in the death of a young man who was shot multiple times while apparently wielding a knife on an empty streetcar.
Const. James Forcillo was charged Monday with second-degree murder in 18-year-old Sammy Yatim's death last month.
The shooting was captured on cellphone and surveillance video on which nine shots can be heard, seconds after shouts for Yatim to drop a knife. The final six shots appear to come after Yatim had already fallen to the floor of the streetcar and he is Tasered.
It's not known how many of the shots hit Yatim, but Ontario's police watchdog — the Special Investigations Unit — has said the young man was shot multiple times.
The videos sparked outrage and prompted hundreds of people to take to the streets in two separate marches, demanding justice for Yatim.
His family released a statement Monday saying they are relieved by the charge, but hope the SIU will look into the actions of the supervising officers and other officers who were on scene "for their lack of intervention in this tragedy."
"Over 20 uniformed police officers were present and no one stepped forward to stop the gun shots or offer any mediation," the family wrote.
"Moving forward we expect complete transparency and accountability. We want to work now to ensure that Sammy's blood wasn't wasted and to prevent any other families from enduring such a tragedy."
Yatim's sister took to Twitter to share her reaction to news of the charge.
"The SIU charged the cop with 2nd degree murder!!! Good morning JUSTICE," tweeted Sarah Yatim.
If convicted, Forcillo would be the first Toronto cop to go to prison on an SIU charge. Since the agency's inception in 1990, 10 other police officers have been charged with second-degree murder or manslaughter, but only one was convicted, and that was overturned on appeal.
Forcillo has arranged through his lawyer to turn himself in Tuesday morning, at which time he will be taken into custody and appear in court, the SIU said in a statement.
Since the officer has received threats, the SIU would not say where Forcillo will surrender himself. Toronto Police Association President Mike McCormack said he is concerned for Forcillo's safety in and out of custody.
"We're always concerned when one of our officers goes before the courts or gets remanded in custody," McCormack said.
"We'll ensure just like anybody else that somebody who's vulnerable is protected...We've had death threats against this officer."
Peter Brauti, the lawyer representing Forcillo, could not immediately be reached for comment. But McCormack spoke to Forcillo and said though he wasn't surprised by the charge, he was disappointed.
"He's obviously upset about the charge, the nature of the charge, concerned about it," McCormack said. "It's definitely had an adverse impact on his life."
In Saskatoon on Monday, federal Justice Minister Peter MacKay called it a "very tragic case."
"It highlights a number of important issues, not the least of which is issues that pertain to mental health questions — police training," MacKay said.
The SIU, which investigates deaths, injuries or allegations of sexual assault involving police, has investigated more than 100 firearm deaths since 1990.
Forcillo is the third to be charged with second-degree murder. One of the other officers was acquitted, while the second had his charge dismissed, though that decision is under appeal.
Eight police officers have been charged with manslaughter in Ontario since 1990 — four of them for the same death — and all were acquitted. Not all were firearm deaths.
The total of seven doesn't include Toronto Police Const. David Cavanagh, who was originally charged with manslaughter but later had his charge upgraded to second-degree murder.
Cavanagh was charged after 26-year-old Eric Osawe was shot as the Emergency Task Force guns and gangs unit searched an apartment in Toronto's west end in 2010. The Osawe family's lawyer has said the man was shot in the back.
The charge was later upgraded, but at the end of a preliminary inquiry this spring, a judge decided there was insufficient evidence to commit Cavanagh to trial on second-degree murder and dismissed the charge.
The Crown has appealed and is asking the judge to reinstate the manslaughter charge.
York Region Const. Randy Martin was acquitted in 2000 of second-degree murder for the shooting death of 44-year-old Tony Romagnuolo. Martin shot Romagnuolo four times in a scuffle outside the man's home after police showed up to arrest his son.
The Romagnuolos testified at the trial that the officers pulled their guns and began shooting during fist fights. Martin said his life hung in the balance as he fought for control of his gun. The son was also shot by another officer, but he survived.
McCormack cited Cavanagh's case as an example of why the public shouldn't rush to judgment against Forcillo.
"Our officer should be judged in this incident based on what the facts and the evidence are, not just a video or not just what somebody saw on YouTube, but looking at the larger, bigger picture," McCormack said.
In addition to the SIU's investigation, Toronto's police chief has said retired justice Dennis O'Connor will lead a separate review of police procedures, use of force and police response to emotionally disturbed people in the wake of Sammy Yatim's death.
Chief Bill Blair has said he understands the public has many questions about police conduct in Yatim's case and has said O'Connor's review will be "extraordinary" in its scope.
Ontario's ombudsman has also launched an investigation, probing what kind of direction the provincial government provides to police for defusing conflict situations.
Andre Marin has said Yatim's shooting raises the question of whether it's time for Ontario to have consistent and uniform guidelines on how police should de-escalate situations before they lead to the use of force.

Famous Jett Jackson, Rizzoli & Isles Star Lee Thompson Young Dead at 29

Lee Thompson Young, who played the title character on Disney's The Famous Jett Jackson and currently stars on TNT's Rizzoli & Isles, has died at age 29, TMZreports. Authorities believe the cause of death is suicide.
See other celebrities we've lost this year
Young's body was found by his landlord with what appeared to be a self-inflicted gunshot wound, according to TMZ. The actor was currently starring as Barry Frost on Rizzoli & Isles. Members of the show's staff became concerned when Young didn't show up for work Monday morning, and called his landlord to check up on him, TMZ reports.
"We are all without the words to truly express our collective grief and profound sadness at the loss of such a sweet, bright light," Rizzoli & Isles creator Janet Tamaro tweeted Monday afternoon. "We are broken-hearted. #RIPLeeThompsonYoung"
Tamaro later released a joint statement with Warner Bros. and TNT that reads, "Everyone at Rizzoli & Isles is devastated by the news of the passing of Lee Thompson Young. We are beyond heartbroken at the loss of this sweet, gentle, good-hearted, intelligent man. He was truly a member of our family. Lee will be cherished and remembered by all who knew and loved him, both on- and offscreen, for his positive energy, infectious smile and soulful grace. We send our deepest condolences and thoughts to his family, to his friends and, most especially, to his beloved mother."
Born in Columbia, S.C., Young landed the lead role in The Famous Jett Jackson in 1998. His subsequent TV credits included roles on Scrubs, FlashForward andSmallville, as well as the Friday Night Lights movie.

Prince William tells CNN about being a father in first interview since birth of son

Prince William has given his first official interview to CNN since his wife, the Duchess of Cambridge, gave birth to their first child.
The future king of Britain sat down with CNN's Max Foster to talk about baby George, his wife Catherine, and what it's like to be a new father.
Prince William has given his first official interview to CNN since his wife, the Duchess of Cambridge, gave birth to their first child.
The future king of Britain sat down with CNN's Max Foster to talk about baby George, his wife Catherine, and what it's like to be a new father.

Philippines Ferry Crash: 32 Dead, 170 missing, Search For Survivors Suspended

CEBU, Philippines, Aug 17 (Reuters) - Worsening weather and sea conditions on Saturday forced the Philippines to suspend a search for survivors of a ferry disaster that killed at least 32 people and left 170 missing, authorities said.

The ferry sank on Friday after a collision just outside the central port of Cebu with a cargo vessel owned by a company involved in the world's worst peacetime maritime disaster nearly 30 years ago.

Divers will resume searching early on Sunday, Transportation Secretary Joseph Emilio Abaya told a news conference in Manila, after heavy rain brought by a typhoon and low pressure had reduced visibility at sea almost to zero.

"Diving operations stopped because of weather conditions," Abaya said, adding that 661 of the 831 passengers and crew on the ferry had been accounted for. With 32 dead and 629 rescued, there are 170 missing. Just 17 of the dead have been identified.

"But we've got information that some bodies have been recovered, and we expect the number of missing to decrease, and we expect the casualties to increase."

Many of the survivors were sick from swallowing oil and seawater, disaster officials said.

Scores, sometimes hundreds, of people die each year in ferry accidents in the Philippines, an archipelago of 7,100 islands with a notoriously poor record for maritime safety. Overcrowding is common, and many of the vessels are in bad condition.

The 40-year-old ferry was approaching Cebu late in the evening when it was struck by the departing cargo vessel, the Sulpicio Express 7, leaving two huge holes in the latter's bow. The ferry sank in minutes, about a kilometre off Cebu.

Small planes and helicopters also scoured the waters and coastal areas of Cebu island for survivors, officials said.

Divers found four bodies outside the sunken ferry hours before the search was halted, said Commander Noel Escalana, a naval operations officer.

"During the dive, they saw bodies from the windows," he told reporters, saying the divers did not attempt to retrieve them. "It's dangerous to enter the ship...Because they need special equipment and extra oxygen tanks."

Escalana added that rescuers had no idea how many people were trapped inside the ship, lying on a seabed around 150 feet (46 metres) below sea level.

Fourteen bodies had been found in the town of Talisay, south of Cebu City, said Imelda Sabillano, another local official.

"We don't know where these bodies came from, but we already have brought to a local morgue 31 bodies for identification," she said, adding that morgue officials awaited the arrival of the 14 bodies to add them to the toll from the disaster.

Officials said a recount at the morgue showed 32 bodies awaited autopsy.

The Sulpicio Express 7 is owned by unlisted firm Philippine Span Asia Carrier Corp, formerly known as Sulpicio Lines Inc, which owned the MV Dona Paz ferry.

That vessel collided with a tanker in the Sibuyan Sea in December 1987, killing 4,375 on the ferry and 11 of the tanker's 13-man crew.

The owners of the ferry involved in Friday's accident said it was carrying 723 passengers, 118 crew and 104 20-ft containers. It had an authorized capacity of 1,010 passengers and crew and 160 containers.

The captains of the two ships are alive but have yet to be questioned, said Rear Admiral Luis Tuason, the coast guard operations chief.

Abaya said initial information showed the cargo ship loaded with container vans bound for Davao on the southern island of Mindanao hit the ferry's "vulnerable part" on the right side.

"We felt the cargo ship hit us and minutes later we noticed our ship was listing," passenger Aldrin Raman told reporters. "I grabbed a life vest and jumped overboard. I saw many passengers doing the same."

One of the crew said the ferry sank within 10 minutes.

"The collision left a gaping hole in the ferry and water started rushing in, so the captain ordered (us to) abandon ship," the crew member said. Most of the passengers were already wearing life jackets before the ship sank, he added.

Another passenger, Jerwin Agudong, said several people had been trapped. "It seems some were not able to get out. We saw dead bodies on the side," he said.

Fishermen on shore said they saw flares.

"It was very dark and we could hear a lot of people shouting, asking for help," said George Palmero, a 35-year-old fisherman who helped pull 10 survivors from the water. (Additional reporting by Rosemarie Francisco, Manuel Mogato and Roli Ng; Editing by Nick Macfie and Clarence Fernandez)

Princess Diana Death: Police Assess 'Relevance And Credibility' Of New Information Received

LONDON — British police say they are examining newly received information relating to the deaths of Princess Diana and Dodi Fayed, and that officers are assessing the information's "relevance and credibility."

Scotland Yard declined to provide details about the information, only saying Saturday in a statement that the assessment will be carried out by officers from its specialist crime and operations unit.

The force stressed that it was not reopening the investigation into the 1997 deaths of Diana and Fayed, who were killed in a car crash in Paris.

In 2008, a British jury ruled that Diana, the Princess of Wales, and her companion, Fayed, were unlawfully killed due to reckless speed and drinking by their driver, and by the reckless pursuit of paparazzi chasing them.

Mohammed Al-Zawahiri Arrested: Brother Of Al-Qaeda Chief Ayman Al-Zawahiri Reportedly Detained In Egypt

CAIRO -- Egyptian authorities have arrested the brother of al-Qaida chief Ayman al-Zawahri, a security official said Saturday.

He said Mohammed al-Zawahri, leader of the ultraconservative Jihadi Salafist group, was detained at a checkpoint in Giza, the city across the Nile from Cairo.

Mohammed al-Zawahri's group espouses a hard-line ideology but was not clandestine prior to Egypt's July 3 coup. He was allied with ousted President Mohammed Morsi, an Islamist, whose supporters are now taking to the streets to protest the killings of its supporters in a security crackdown last week.

The official declined to give further details. He spoke anonymously as he was not authorized to talk to the press.

Authorities said earlier that al-Zawahri had commanded insurgents in Sinai Peninsula.

Street fighting in Cairo and other clashes across the country left 173 people dead on Friday, authorities say.

An anti-military coalition led by Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood has called for a week of protests, further escalating unrest in the country. The coalition says that they won't back down until it topples the government installed by the military.

Clashes continued Saturday morning near a downtown Cairo mosque, where hundreds of Morsi's supporters remained after barricading themselves inside overnight.

Egypt threatens to ban Muslim Brotherhood as troops clear Islamists from Cairo mosque

Egyptian security forces used tear gas and live ammunition to storm a mosque in Cairo where up to 1,000 Islamist protesters had barricaded themselves in, as the military’s ruthless crackdown intensified.

Dramatic footage from inside al-Fatah Mosque in Ramses Square showed people fighting for breath as troops fired in canisters of tear gas, filling a hall of worship with clouds of white smoke.
Outside, troops who had besieged the mosque exchanged fire with gunmen who were using its minaret as a sniper point.
The siege was one of numerous flashpoints across the country on Saturday as Egypt’s generals continued to defy international condemnation of their actions. Hundreds of lives have been lost during one of the bloodiest weeks in the country’s recent history.
In other developments yesterday on another dramatic day in Egypt:
* The government threatened to outlaw the Muslim Brotherhood altogether;
* Officials said the death toll from Friday’s ‘day of rage’ protests was 173, on top of 638 killed during violence earlier in the week;
* The Muslim Brotherhood said the son of its spiritual leader had been killed;
* Video footage showed a protester being shot in the stomach as he staged a “Tiananmen Square” style protest in front of a tank;
* Egyptian authorities arrested Mohammed al-Zawahri, the brother of the al-Qaida chief, Ayman al-Zawahri, for supporting the Islamists.
The siege began when large numbers of Muslim Brotherhood supporters took refuge overnight in the al-Fatah mosque in Ramses Square, already the scene of at least 35 deaths on Friday. The mosque’s precincts had been turned into a makeshift mortuary, with dozens of blood-soaked corpses bearing bullet wounds to the head and chest.
By daybreak, troops had sealed off the roads around mosque with tanks and barbed wire. For a few hours, efforts were made to negotiate a peaceful resolution to the stand off.
But the protesters, who had barricaded themselves in with piles of furniture, refused to leave, fearing not just arrest but beatings by anti-Brotherhood mobs who had gathered outside.
Armed with sticks and metal rods, the thugs, who some suspected of being drafted in by the government, were attacking men with beards, women in Islamic headscarves, and anyone else suspected of being a Muslim Brotherhood supporter, as well as foreign journalists.
In an attempt to avoid another round of serious bloodshed, the army sent in soldiers to negotiate with the protesters - but with little success.
Ahmed Emara, whose father Saad Emara was inside the mosque negotiating for an evacuation, gave The Sunday Telegraph an account of what had gone on inside.
“Army officers initially told my father that the people besieged in the mosque would be taken for investigation by the military prosecution,” he said.
When that offer was rejected, he claimed the army had promised that if the occupiers agreed to leave peacefully, they would be given safe passage from the mosque and then released.
“The evacuation had started in groups of five, then they heard shooting sounds,” Ahmed said.
A gunman stationed in the mosque’s minaret had opened fire at the army and into the hostile crowds gathered outside.
“They said that one of the protesters ascended the minaret and shot on them,” Ahmed said. “But the gates to the minaret was controlled by the army, and there was no way that the protesters could go up.”
Among those who had been trapped inside the mosque were four Irish children of Hussein Halawa, the imam of Dublin’s biggest mosque.
Omaima Halawa, 21, who was with her two sisters Somaia, 27, and Fatima, 23, as well as their younger brother Ibrihim, 17, sought refuge in the mosque after Friday’s protests and spoke to the Irish national broadcaster RTE from inside.
“We are surrounded in the mosque both inside and outside,” she said. “The security forces broke in and threw tear gas at us.”
From the family home at Firhouse in the south of the city, another sister Nasaybi said they were enduring a terrible ordeal.
She said: “We are really worried. We do not know how to help them. We are just trying to support them by calling and giving them some hope that they will get home safely.”
Running out of patience, the army finally made the decision to storm the mosque, sending in the tear gas canisters and dragging away the remaining Muslim Brotherhood supporters. Security officials claimed ending the standoff had been essential after they received information suggesting that the group planned to turn it into a new sit-in protest camp.
Prime Minister Hazem el-Beblawi, who leads the military-backed government, later told journalists that authorities had no choice but to use force in the wake of recent violence.
“I feel sorry for valuable blood shed,” el-Beblawi said. However, he cautioned that there will be no “reconciliation with those whose hands are stained with blood or those who hold weapons against the country’s institutions.”
The street confrontations highlight the bitter social divides that the recent political turmoil in Egypt has thrown up.
Despite the recent bloodshed, which their own ranks have born the brunt of, Muslim Brotherhood protesters have vowed to carry on protesting until the government reinstates the presidency of Mohammed Morsi, who was removed from office in a military coup on July 3rd.
But while Mr Morsi was democratically elected, the coup had popular backing from non-Islamist Egyptians, who say the Brotherhood planned to turn the country into a theocracy.
The viciousness of the recent crackdown against Brotherhood protests over Mr Morsi’s ousting, however, now risks robbing the new government of any good will it mave had in the West, where governments had been prepared to turn a diplomatic blind eye to Mr Morsi’s ouster if it led to longer-term stability in Egypt.
Egypt’s prime minister, Hazem el-Beblawi, proposed disbanding the Brotherhood as a political party altogether, a move that would take it back to the outlaw status it had during the dictatorship of President Hosni Mubarak. Many fear that could lead to it reverting to the kind of armed resistance that it gave up decades ago, backed by harder-line Islamic factions.
The crackdown on the Islamists continued across Egypt yesterday, with the interior ministry saying that more than 1,000 Brotherhood supporters had been arrested in the past week, including 558 in Cairo alone. Among those taken into custody was Mohammed al-Zawahri, the leader of the ultraconservative Islamist group who is also the brother of Ayman al-Zawahri, the leader of Al-Qaeda.
The Brotherhood also announced that Mohammed Badie, the son of the movement’s senior spiritual leader, Mohammed Badie, was among those killed on Friday.
Meanwhile, during Brotherhood-led protests in the city of Ismailia, 100 miles outside Cairo, dramatic video footage emerged of a man being shot as he attempted a Tiananmen Square style protest in front of a security cordon. Having walked towards a line of tanks with his hands raised in the air, he then crumpled the ground after being shot.
Elsewhere in Egypt, at least 10 people were killed by security forces and dozens injured in the canal city of Suez when they gathered to protest in defiance of the curfew.
Badr’s staunch defence of the army, despite the deaths of almost 800 people in the past three days, shows how many Egyptians who consider themselves liberals are sitting back and watching what human rights campaigners say is one setback for democracy and the rule of law after another.
“What Egypt is passing through now is the price, a high price, of getting rid of the Brotherhood’s fascist group before it takes over everything and ousts us all,” Mr Badr, 28, told Reuters.
Security officials have advised Mr Badr to reside at a secret location for his safety, but last week he appeared on state television urging Egyptians to take to the streets and form “popular committees” to protect citizens from the Brotherhood. Already there are complains that such groups have turned into anti-Brotherhood vigilante movements.

NSA loophole allows warrantless search for US citizens' emails and phone calls

Exclusive: Spy agency has secret backdoor permission to search databases for individual Americans' communications

Detail of Section 702 of the Fisa Amendments Act (FAA), which gives the NSA authority to target without warrant the communications of foreign targets.

The National Security Agency has a secret backdoor into its vast databases under a legal authority enabling it to search for US citizens'email and phone calls without a warrant, according to a top-secret document passed to the Guardian by Edward Snowden.

The previously undisclosed rule change allows NSA operatives to hunt for individual Americans' communications using their name or other identifying information. Senator Ron Wyden told the Guardian that the law provides the NSA with a loophole potentially allowing "warrantless searches for the phone calls or emails of law-abiding Americans".

The authority, approved in 2011, appears to contrast with repeated assurances from Barack Obama and senior intelligence officials to both Congress and the American public that the privacy of US citizens is protected from the NSA's dragnet surveillance programs.

The intelligence data is being gathered under Section 702 of the of theFisa Amendments Act (FAA), which gives the NSA authority to target without warrant the communications of foreign targets, who must be non-US citizens and outside the US at the point of collection.

The communications of Americans in direct contact with foreign targets can also be collected without a warrant, and the intelligence agencies acknowledge that purely domestic communications can also be inadvertently swept into its databases. That process is known as "incidental collection" in surveillance parlance.

But this is the first evidence that the NSA has permission to search those databases for specific US individuals' communications.

A secret glossary document provided to operatives in the NSA's Special Source Operations division – which runs the Prism program and large-scale cable intercepts through corporate partnerships with technology companies – details an update to the "minimization" procedures that govern how the agency must handle the communications of US persons. That group is defined as both American citizens and foreigners located in the US.

"While the FAA 702 minimization procedures approved on 3 October 2011 now allow for use of certain United States person names and identifiers as query terms when reviewing collected FAA 702 data," the glossary states, "analysts may NOT/NOT [not repeat not] implement any USP [US persons] queries until an effective oversight process has been developed by NSA and agreed to by DOJ/ODNI [Office of the Director of National Intelligence]."

The term "identifiers" is NSA jargon for information relating to an individual, such as telephone number, email address, IP address and username as well as their name.

The document – which is undated, though metadata suggests this version was last updated in June 2012 – does not say whether the oversight process it mentions has been established or whether any searches against US person names have taken place.

Senator Ron Wyden. Photograph: Jacquelyn Martin/AP

Wyden, an Oregon Democrat on the Senate intelligence committee, has obliquely warned for months that the NSA's retention of Americans' communications incidentally collected and its ability to search through it has been far more extensive than intelligence officials have stated publicly. Speaking this week, Wyden told the Guardian it amounts to a "backdoor search" through Americans' communications data.

"Section 702 was intended to give the government new authorities to collect the communications of individuals believed to be foreigners outside the US, but the intelligence community has been unable to tell Congress how many Americans have had their communications swept up in that collection," he said.

"Once Americans' communications are collected, a gap in the law that I call the 'back-door searches loophole' allows the government to potentially go through these communications and conduct warrantless searches for the phone calls or emails of law-abiding Americans."

Wyden, along with his intelligence committee colleague Mark Udall, have attempted repeatedly to warn publicly about the ability of the intelligence community to look at the communications of US citizens, but are limited by their obligation not to reveal highly classified information.

But in a letter they recently wrote to the NSA director, General Keith Alexander, the two senators warned that a fact sheet released by theNSA in the wake of the initial Prism revelations to reassure the American public about domestic surveillance was misleading.

In the letter, they warned that Americans' communications might be inadvertently collected and stored under Section 702, despite rules stating only data on foreigners should be collected and retained.

"[W]e note that this same fact sheet states that under Section 702, 'Any inadvertently acquired communication of or concerning a US personmust be promptly destroyed if it is neither relevant to the authorised purpose nor evidence of a crime,'" they said.

"We believe that this statement is somewhat misleading, in that it implied the NSA has the ability to determine how many American communications it has collected under Section 702, or that the law does not allow the NSA to deliberately search for the records of particular Americans."

The foreign intelligence surveillance (Fisa) court issues approvals annually authorizing such operations, with specific rules on who can be targeted and what measures must be taken to minimize any details "inadvertently" collected on US persons.

Secret minimization procedures dating from 2009, published in June by the Guardian, revealed that the NSA could make use of any "inadvertently acquired" information on US persons under a defined range of circumstances, including if they held usable intelligence, information on criminal activity, threat of harm to people or property, are encrypted or are believed to contain any information relevant to cybersecurity.

At that stage, however, the rules did not appear to allow for searches of collected data relating to specific US persons.

Assurances from Obama and senior administration officials to the American public about the privacy of their communications have relied on the strict definition of what constitutes "targeting" while making no mention of the permission to search for US data within material that has already been collected.

The day after the Guardian revealed details of the NSA's Prism program, President Obama said: "Now, with respect to the internet and emails, this doesn't apply to US citizens and it doesn't apply to people living in the United States."

Speaking at a House hearing on 18 June this year, deputy attorney general James Cole told legislators "[T]here's a great deal of minimization procedures that are involved here, particularly concerning any of the acquisition of information that deals or comes from US persons.

"As I said, only targeting people outside the United States who are not US persons. But if we do acquire any information that relates to a US person, under limited criteria only can we keep it."

Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat who chairs the Senate intelligence committee, said in June 2012 that she believed the intelligence agencies and the Justice Department were sufficiently mindful of Americans' privacy.

"The intelligence community is strictly prohibited from using Section 702 to target a US person, which must at all times be carried out pursuant to an individualized court order based upon probable cause," Feinstein stated in a report provided to the Senate record.

While there are several congressional proposals to constrain the NSA's bulk collection of Americans' phone records, there has to date been much less legislative appetite to abridge its powers under Section 702 – as lawmakers are satisfied it doesn't sufficiently violate Americans' privacy.

"702 is focused outside the United States at non-citizens," said Adam Schiff, a member of the House intelligence committee. "The evidence of the effectiveness of 702 is much more substantial than 215 [the bulk phone records collection]. So I think there are fewer fourth amendment concerns and more evidence of the saliency of the program."

Wyden and Udall – both of whom say foreign surveillance conducted under Section 702 has legitimate value for US national security – have tried and failed to restrict the NSA's ability to collect and store Americans' communications that it accidentally acquires.

Wyden told the Guardian that he raised concerns about the loophole with President Obama during an August 1 meeting with legislators about the NSA's surveillance powers.

"I believe that Congress should reform Section 702 to provide better protections for Americans' privacy, and that this could be done without losing the value that this collection provides," he said.

The Guardian put the latest revelations to the NSA and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence but no response had been received by the time of publication.

Gunmen kidnap Turkish airline pilots in Lebanon

Gunmen stopped a bus near Beirut, Lebanon, in the early hours of Friday, boarded it and kidnapped two Turkish pilots, Turkey's foreign ministry said.
The pilots work for Turkish Airlines. They were riding the bus from Rafic Hariri International Airport to their hotel when the assailants in two vehicles stopped it, Lebanon's state-run National News Agency reported.
Reports on the number of attackers varied from four to eight.
Other employees aboard the bus made it safely to the hotel and are to head back to Turkey later Friday, the foreign ministry said.
"The Lebanese government has begun taking the necessary steps for an investigation," the ministry said.
Security agents questioned the driver as a witness, the news agency reported.

Oliver Stone’s Son Says 9/11 Was an ‘Inside Job,’ Hezbollah Aren’t Terrorists, Israel Is a ‘Crusader State’

Hollywood director Oliver Stone's son Sean made news last year when he said he'd converted to Islam on Valentine's Day while working on a film in Iran and that he believed then Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was "misunderstood."

Now the 28-year old actor and director is voicing his opinions on the Quran ("a very sensible book"), 9/11 ("an inside job"), Hezbollah ("don't consider them to be terrorists") and Iran (a "very civilized people").

The younger Stone, who says he is part Jewish and was baptized a Christian before converting to Shi'a Islam, shared his views in an interview last week with RT, the Russian government's English-language television network.

"The Quran is a very sensible book. If you read it, frankly it makes a whole lot of sense regarding their interpretation of Jesus who they look to as a prophet. And obviously the Abrahamic lineage from Abraham to Moses are all very much respected in the Quran," Stone said (emphasis added).
Revealing opinions in line with so-called 9/11 "truthers," Stone said, "9/11 was probably an inside job of some kind that it was not simply a rag-tag group of terrorists led by bin Laden who conducted this operation." 

Speaking to an interviewer who expressed sympathy for his opinions, Stone called the U.S. war on terror in response to the attacks on the U.S. homeland "over a decade of constant fear mongering and aggression."

"Despite the fact that there's more awareness on it, why is it that we do continue to see this propaganda about the boogeyman terrorists whether they be Muslim or Russian or North Korean or what not? What is that system? It's a cycle of fear. It's a cycle that has to be broken internally," Stone said.

Oliver Stone has in the past railed against what he called Israel's "powerful lobby in Washington" and it appears his son sympathizes with his views. Sean Stone referred to Israelis as "European settlers" who don't feel "comfortable in what is historically Palestine."

The younger Stone says many Middle Easterners object to Israel's existence, because they view it "as a crusader state, a crusader kingdom."

"So when they see all these European, Russian Jews, coming to Israel, they're saying look at these European settlers. They're not Jews from this region, they have no ties to the land," he said.

"Now, I'm not a proponent of attacking Israel or trying to dissolve it at this point, but I'm simply saying that that is why there's so much antagonism to Israel," Sean Stone added.

Stone spoke to Fox News' Bill O'Reilly last year about his impressions of Iran, saying "With Ahmadinejad, he's a little bit misunderstood because there are many factions in that country and he said some sensational things."

On Hezbollah, which Iran funds and trains, Stone now says it's "debatable" if the group is terrorist.

"As they operate within Lebanese borders, I don't' consider them to be terrorists. I see them as defenders of Lebanese sovereignty because they, Lebanon has been invaded numerous times by Israel," Stone said.

"So Iran as a terrorist sponsor I think is a great exaggeration," Stone added.

Stone compared suicide bombers to U.S. military drone strikes on terrorists, saying "the whole concept of terrorism is quite insane at this point where we have drones and missiles being launched and killing hundreds of thousands of people in that region, across the Middle East, across North Africa since this war on terrorism occurred."

"Because we killed them with our missiles, we don't consider ourselves terrorists. We only consider those who blow themselves up terrorists. And obviously you cannot create that qualification. That's a 1984 Orwellian double speak term," Stone said.

"So, the idea of Iran as this great terrorist enemy is not true. They're very civilized people, they have a 3,000 year history," the actor said.

"They are not looking to destroy themselves in the process of a war against ... Israel unless there's a good motivation to do so," he added.

40 die in attacks in Pakistani city on religious holidays

A gun assault and a separate bombing have killed at least 40 people in two days in the city of Quetta in Pakistan. Both attacks seemed to target local officials.
Militants sprayed bullets into cars near a mosque Friday in the capital of the province of Balochistan, killing 10 people on the Muslim holy day of Eid, police said.
At least 30 others were wounded in the attack before prayers.
On Thursday, a suicide bombing tore through the funeral of a police official in Quetta, killing 30 people and wounding at least 40 others.
In Friday's attack, a former provincial lawmaker was stepping into the mosque when about a dozen men opened fire, said police spokesman Mir Zubair Mehmood. Half of those killed where the politician's bodyguards.
The others were civilians.
The assault drew intense return fire, which lasted for half an hour, a witness said. The battle sent people rushing for cover into the mosque, said Muhammad Ejaz, who was there to pray.
Police have arrested eight suspects who had explosives and weapons. "We have launched search operations in different parts of the city," Mehmood said. They have also tightened security after the two attacks.
There has been no claim of responsibility in either Thursday's or Friday's attack.
Elsewhere in Balochistan, militants stopped a bus Tuesday, kidnapped 13 people and took them to nearby mountains, where they shot them to death.
Many possible assailants
The area around Quetta is plagued by strife. It is close to the border with Afghanistan, and members of the Taliban often cross into Pakistan.
Local militants in the province, which is rich in natural gas, have been fighting Pakistani national military forces for self-rule.
For years, the Balochistan Liberation Army has complained that the government pays little attention to people and their economic needs.
During national elections this year, the province saw violent attacks on polling places. Bombers struck voters who had just cast their ballots as well as candidates and their supporters.
The Pakistani Taliban, or Tehrik-i-Taliban, are also believed to foment unrest in the province in the country's southwest.
Sectarian attacks on ethic Shiite Muslims by fundamentalist Sunni Muslims are also common.

Pakistan has become hub of problems: Nawaz

Mian M. Nawaz Sharif

KARACHI: Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif said on Thursday that all the parties needed to be taken along for the development process as the country had become a hub of problems.

Extending a hand to both the PPP and MQM for the ‘sake of national unity’, the prime minister said unity among democratic parties was crucial to resolve various problems being faced by the county.The prime minister was in Karachi on a day-long visit for the first time since being elected as the prime minister.

Speaking to media persons outside the Quaid-i-Azam’s mausoleum where he paid his regards, the prime minister said he respected the mandate of the PPP, MQM and all other parties and vowed to take along all the parties while making major national and provincial decisions.

The prime minister pointed towards Sindh Chief Minister Syed Qaim Ali Shah, who is from the PPP, and Governor Sindh Dr Ishratul Ebad Khan, who is from the MQM, who flanked him, and said: “Both are very dear to me and we respect their mandate.”

“Pakistan will move forward on the path of prosperity if we all (political parties) remain together,” he stressed.

“I see the future of Pakistan very bright and prosperous,” he said, adding that the problems would be resolved through commitment, patience and hard work.

Reiterating his party’s commitment to the democratic process, Nawaz said he was satisfied with the democratic transition in the country, adding the fact that the change came through ballot and not with bullet, agitation and street protest was an omen that Pakistan was stronger today. He said by holding of general and presidential elections, the country had embarked upon the democratic pathway.

Later, dismissing the rumours of the governor’s rule in Sindh at a press briefing at Gadani, the prime minister said the country was facing numerous problems and it was vital that all stakeholders stand together to confront the challenges. He said his government was committed to serving the masses and vowed that it would not hide anything from the people.The chief ministers of Sindh and Balochistan accompanied the prime minister.

Nawaz said a comprehensive counter-terrorism policy would be devised based on the feedback of provinces.“I have directed all the four chief ministers to work out the issue of terrorism within the domain of their provinces,” he said.

The chief ministers of all the provinces were also asked to form necessary committees and prepare draft of reforms, which he said would be taken up later at a federal-level meeting on security.

The prime minister said it would take some time to arrive at a solid strategy against terrorism that would aim at raising a counter-terrorism force, fighting the militancy and ensuring effective policing.

The prime minister termed his meeting with the US Secretary of State John Kerry as “positive” that focused on diverse issues, including bilateral relations, trade ties and joint efforts against terrorism.

To a question on improving the relations with India, Nawaz said the government wanted to enhance trade and investment ties with its neighbour. “The link initiated from the Lahore Declaration will be rejoined,” the premier said while referring to the popular agreement signed between the governments of Pakistan and India back in 1999.

On the resignation of Justice (retd) Fakhruddin G Ebrahim as Chief Election Commissioner (CEC), the prime minister said he wished he continued working in this capacity. He lauded the contribution of Fakhru Bhai in holding free, fair and transparent elections. He added that the resignation had been sent to the president for approval.

Kerry hopes Pakistan drone strikes to end 'very soon'

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry told Pakistanis on Thursday he hoped U.S. drone strikes in their nation would end "very, very soon," a message meant to ease anti-American resentment in the strategic country.

After meeting Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, Kerry said they had agreed to re-establish a "full partnership", hoping to end years of acrimony over the drone strikes and other grievances including the May 2011 U.S. raid that killed Osama bin Laden.

In a television interview later, Kerry said of the drone strikes, "I think the program will end as we have eliminated most of the threat and continue to eliminate it."

"I think the president has a very real timeline and we hope it's going to be very, very soon," he told Pakistan Television, when asked whether the U.S. had a timetable for ending drone strikes aimed at militants in Pakistan.

Kerry's comments went further than those of President Barack Obama, who said in a May 23 speech that the need for drone strikes would decrease in "the Afghan war theater" as U.S. troops withdraw by the end of 2014.

But Obama did not speak of ending drone strikes entirely and his speech offered a detailed justification for the tactic "against terrorists who pose a continuing and imminent threat to the American people, and when there are no other governments capable of effectively addressing the threat."

U.S. drone missiles have targeted areas near the Afghan border, including North Waziristan, the main stronghold for various militant groups aligned with al Qaeda and the Taliban, since 2004. Pakistanis have been angered by reports of civilian casualties and what they see as an abuse of their sovereignty.

U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan have fallen significantly over the past 2 1/2 years, totaling 17 so far this year, versus 48 in all of 2012 and 73 in 2011, according to a tally kept by the New America Foundation.

'We are asking them to stop it'

It was unclear if, in their lengthy face-to-face talks, Sharif asked Kerry to halt the drone attacks.

When asked whether Pakistan wanted the United States to curtail the strikes, his foreign affairs adviser, Sartaj Aziz, told reporters, "We are asking them to stop it, not just curtail it."

Besides the drones and the killing of bin Laden in 2011, relations have been strained by Pakistan's support for Taliban insurgents fighting Western troops in Afghanistan as well as by a NATO air attack in which 24 Pakistani soldiers were killed.

"I want to emphasize the relationship is not defined simply by the threats we face, it is not only a relationship about combating terrorism, it is about supporting the people of Pakistan, particularly helping at this critical moment for Pakistan's economic revival," Kerry told reporters.

A new government in Pakistan and a new secretary of state in Washington have increased hopes the two sides can allay their grievances - something both hope to gain from, with Pakistan's economy badly needing support and the United States aiming to withdraw the bulk of its troops from Afghanistan next year.

Kerry, who as a senator sponsored legislation to provide $7 billion in assistance to Pakistan over five years, said he had invited Sharif to visit the United States, Pakistan's biggest donor, for talks with Obama.

"What was important today was that there was a determination ... to move this relationship to the full partnership that it ought to be, and to find the ways to deal with individual issues that have been irritants," he said.

'Behind the bonhomie, trouble lurks'

Michael Kugelman, an analyst at the Woodrow Wilson International Center think tank, said he believed Washington had no intention of ending drone strikes in Pakistan before the end of 2014, when it pulls troops out of neighboring Afghanistan.

Kugelman said while the rhetoric had been toned down, the drones dispute and a proposal by Sharif for peace talks with the Pakistani branch of the Taliban would fuel tensions.

Kugelman said talks with the Pakistani Taliban, a loose alliance of al Qaeda-linked militants fighting to topple the Pakistan government, could threaten U.S. security interests in Afghanistan at a time when the Obama administration is trying to orchestrate an orderly withdrawal.

"Behind the bonhomie, trouble lurks," Kugelman said in a opinion piece "Instead of depicting Kerry's Pakistan visit as a prelude to an extended period of goodwill, we should simply regard it as a respite from the tensions."

But both sides expressed a willingness to overcome their grievances and to start afresh.

Ties have improved fractionally since last year after the two sides reached a deal to reopen land routes used to supply Western troops in Afghanistan that were cut off after the air strike in November 2011 that killed Pakistani soldiers.

Kerry announced the relaunching of the U.S.-Pakistan Strategic Dialogue, broad based talks focused on security, economic and development issues, which broke down in 2010 amid worsening tensions between the governments.

Remarks With Pakistani Foreign Affairs Advisor Sartaj Aziz

Remarks With Pakistani Foreign Affairs Advisor Sartaj Aziz

Remarks

John Kerry
Secretary of State

Prime Minister's Residence

Islamabad, Pakistan

August 1, 2013

MODERATOR: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. (Inaudible.)

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, thank you very much. As-Salaam Alaikum. It’s a pleasure to be here and I was privileged to be able to meet with the Prime Minister as well as the Prime Minister’s Foreign Affairs Advisor, His Excellency Sartaj Aziz. We’ve just come from a very productive meeting with Prime Minister Sharif, and I’m very grateful to him for delaying his trip. He is leaving for a pilgrimage to Mecca during this most Holy Month of Ramadan, and I want to honor his willingness to delay his trip a little bit in order to be able to meet today. I’m very grateful to him for that.

Let me say what a pleasure it is for me to be back in Pakistan. I have been here many times, as the people of Pakistan know, and I was very privileged to work in the United States Senate in order to pass what became known as the Kerry-Lugar-Berman bill, which provided significant economic assistance to the people of Pakistan. And we did that because we specifically wanted to make clear that America does not want to have a transactional relationship, we do not want to have a relationship based on the moment or based on an issue such as counterterrorism or Afghanistan, but we want a relationship with the people of Pakistan for the long term. One of the largest diasporas of Pakistanis lives in the United States of America. We have a huge Pakistani-American population. We’re proud of their many contributions to America, to our society, and they are proud always of their heritage and of their continuing links to their homeland, to Pakistan.

I also want to applaud the people of Pakistan for this remarkable, historic transition that has taken place here with this election. I was privileged to be here a few years ago at the last election with then Senator Joe Biden and Senator Chuck Hagel. Now the three of us are privileged to work for President Obama in his Administration – obviously, one as the Vice President of the United States, Secretary Hagel is the Secretary of Defense. So we’re privileged – all three of us – to continue to work on the relationship with Pakistan, and it’s with our friendship and our understanding as we come here today at an historic time in Pakistan’s democratic journey. I was privileged to be here the day of the election for the first transfer of power from one president to another at the ballot box. And now we have seen the first transfer of that elected president civilian to another civilian president. So the march towards democracy in Pakistan is something to be celebrated. And that is another reason why I’m privileged to be here at this moment. The people of Pakistan deserve enormous credit for their role in the peaceful transition of power from one democratically-elected government to another.

I’m here with a simple message: The United States is committed to a long-term partnership with the people of Pakistan, and we remain fully engaged in building a relationship that is based on mutual interests and mutual respect. And we are working closely with the new government in order to advance a shared vision of the future that is marked by peace, by stability, and by prosperity.

It is also no secret that along this journey in the last few years we’ve experienced a few differences. I think we came here today, both the Prime Minister and myself, with a commitment that we cannot allow events that might divide us in a small way to distract from the common values and the common interests that unite us in big ways. As we discussed this morning, the common interests far exceed and far outweigh any differences. So we’re here to speak honestly with each other, openly about any gaps that may exist that we want to try to bridge. And our people deserve that we talk directly and with candor and represent their interests.

I’m pleased to announce that today very quickly we were able to agree to a resumption of the Strategic Dialogue in order to foster a deeper, broader, and more comprehensive partnership between our countries. And this revitalized dialogue will address in a realistic fashion all of the many key issues between us, from border management to counterterrorism to promoting U.S. private investment and to Pakistan’s own journey to economic revitalization.

I want to emphasize the relationship is not defined simply by the threats that we face. It is not only a relationship about combatting terrorism. It is about supporting the people of Pakistan and particularly helping at this critical moment for Pakistan’s economic revival. That has been a centerpiece of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s campaign, it is a centerpiece of his governing efforts, and it will be a centerpiece of our relationship.

The Prime Minister has outlined an ambitious agenda of reforms that will unlock growth and opportunity. And I know that some of these reforms are going to be difficult. They always are. But they are essential to creating sustainable development, more reliable energy supplies, and better services for the people of Pakistan.

Our partnership is also about energy, education, trade, and investment. We have the largest Fulbright program in the world right here in Pakistan. And through the Kerry-Lugar-Berman Act, we’ve helped to bring 1,000 megawatts of power to the national grid, which is providing power and uplifting the lives of 16 million Pakistanis. We’ve launched a new investment fund that will help grow small and medium sized enterprises. And I’m pleased to report that we are funding the rehabilitation of all four major trade routes between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Pakistan’s regional position brings enormous economic opportunities, and we want to recognize those. That’s why we welcome and encourage the steps that Pakistan and India have taken to expand their economic relationship. As I said when I visited New Delhi just a few weeks ago, if Pakistan and India can confidently invest in each other, then the rest of the world is more confidently going to invest in both of them, and the returns on that investment to this region will be simply enormous.

Now, of course, Pakistan cannot achieve its full economic potential until it overcomes extremism, extremist threats within its borders. I want to say that Pakistan troops have fought very bravely against this threat and its people have suffered enormously, including perhaps more than 40,000 Pakistanis who have been killed by terrorists over the past decade. The truth is we face a common enemy in terrorism, and the choice for Pakistanis is clear: Will the forces of violent extremism be allowed to grow more dominant, eventually overpowering the moderate majority? And I ask anybody in Pakistan to ask themselves: How many bridges have those terrorists offered to build? How many schools have they opened? How many economic programs have they laid out for the people? How many energy plants have they tried to build? I think the choice is clear. I believe Pakistanis are going to recommit to the values that are espoused by the founder of the country, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, who helped people come together to build a stable, moderate democracy and an economically vibrant and tolerant nation that is at peace with itself and its neighbors.

The reality is that the fates of Afghanistan and Pakistan are intertwined. And addressing the threat that is posed by cross-border militancy is a key aspect of our Strategic Dialogue. This is a challenge that cannot be met by any one country. It will take a united effort to resolve the issues of safe havens and political reconciliation.

So I want to thank His Excellency in particular for his visit to Kabul, which was a very important visit last month. Both of our countries share an interest in a unified, stable, and peaceful Afghanistan, and so we greatly appreciate Pakistan’s assistance in the Afghan reconciliation process. And that is a process that obviously will take time and perseverance.

In the end, the relationship between the United States and Pakistan has traveled a long way. And yes, we still do have ground to cover. But after my discussions today, I can tell you unequivocally that we do share a long-term vision for the relationship. And I believe that in Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif we have someone who is committed to try to grow that relationship.

To ensure that we continue our important bilateral conversation at the highest levels, I have extended on behalf of the President of the United States an invitation to Prime Minister Sharif to meet with the President and have a bilateral meeting with him in the United States this fall.

So I thank you again, Your Excellency, for the gracious hospitality which I always have received when I come here to Pakistan. But thank you for the hospitality and welcome you’ve shown me and my team here today, and I will look forward after your comments to taking a couple of questions.

MR. AZIZ: Thank you. It’s my pleasure to welcome Secretary of State John Kerry on his first bilateral visit to Pakistan and also thank him for the very positive and constructive statement that he just made. Senator Kerry is a very familiar and well-respected figure who has always been welcomed in Pakistan as a good friend. We appreciate the leadership that he has exhibited in the past as the Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and now in his new capacity as Secretary of State to promote and strengthen the partnership between our two countries.

As Secretary Kerry mentioned, we have had very intensive and frank discussion in a very collegial atmosphere to strengthen the foundations of our friendship and to further build our partnership to achieve our shared goals in the future. As he mentioned, in these foundations there are many mutually reinforcing elements. The U.S. is our largest trading partner and a major source of foreign direct investment and economic assistance. We have – Pakistan has a large diaspora in the United States, and a significant number of highly-educated Pakistanis both in the public and private sectors owe their skills to universities in the U.S. However, most importantly --

SECRETARY KERRY: I think they have a microphone problem.

MR. AZIZ: However, most importantly, it is our shared faith in democracy and respect for the rule of law and human freedoms and commitment to the promotion of peace and security in the region that binds our countries in a new and stronger partnership. As we look into the future, we want trade, more trade, larger investment and cooperation in development, including education as the building blocks of a new and renewed partnership.

In this regard, we highlighted the importance of securing greater market access for Pakistani products in the U.S. and larger foreign direct investment as the new government attaches highest priorities to economic revival. I also conveyed our gratitude to the U.S. for their support for the Diamer-Bhasha dam as a part of its vital effort to deal with the energy crisis.

Of course, these efforts to revive the economy and produce – will not produce full results without peace and stability in our region. In fact, both of us agreed that Pakistan wishes to have good relation with all its neighbors and we hope to expand our connectivity for the mutual benefit.

There are, of course, other challenges too, and today we have discussed the path forward as the U.S. draws down its forces in Afghanistan in areas such as Afghan reconciliation, ground lines of communication, IEDs, counterterrorism. We have to improve – we have improved our bilateral coordination significantly, and we have continued to work to improve them further.

I have reiterated Pakistan’s clear commitment to facilitating U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan and supporting any Afghan-led and Afghan-owned solution and reconciliation for peace and stability in Afghanistan.

I also briefed Secretary Kerry about the (inaudible) of a comprehensive counterterrorism strategy our government is in the process of formulating in consultation with all the stakeholders.

We also shared our concerns on the drone strikes which Pakistan not only considers a violation of our sovereignty but it’s also counterproductive as they undermine the overall counterterrorism cooperation efforts.

And as Secretary Kerry mentioned, in order to give impetus to these understandings, we have agreed on the resumption of the Strategic Dialogue process and holding the next ministerial-level dialogue within the next six months. As some of you would recall, this dialogue started in 2010 and three sessions were held within 2010, in March, July and October. But then several events derailed this process and no meeting has been held since October 2010, and therefore the objective of transforming U.S.-Pakistan relations from a transactional to a sustainable strategic partnership has remained unfulfilled. And we think after the historic democratic transition in Pakistan the time to realize this objective has arrived, and that is what we have agreed on.

And we are also grateful for the invitation to the Prime Minister visit President Obama later this year which will further help to (inaudible) and strengthen. And in particular on the economic front, which is the key building block of our relationship, we hope that we can double our bilateral trade through enhanced market access to something like $11 billion in the next five years.

So I thank Secretary Kerry for this visit. Let me state it clearly that we are committed to work together in all these areas in a very pragmatic and positive manner on the basis of respect for each other’s interests as well as concerns. So I thank you again and look forward to seeing you (inaudible).

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you, Sartaj. Thank you very much.

MODERATOR: We’ll take four questions, two each side. Michael Gordon of New York Times. Sir, you’ll have to speak up because (inaudible).

QUESTION: Hello. Okay. Mr. Secretary, the effort to get talks going with the Afghan Taliban in Doha is frozen and it now appears that NATO’s military mission may well end and that most if not all of the NATO troops may be gone before any negotiations even get underway. And that means that the United States’ leverage and the Afghan Government’s leverage in these talks will be reduced if they’re ever resumed. What have you asked the Pakistanis to do to get these talks going, and what steps are you taking to bring the United States military strategy and the diplomatic strategy into alignment?

And a question, please, for Mr. Aziz: What specific efforts is Pakistan undertaking now to get these talks underway? And sir, as you know, the United States has repeatedly pressed Pakistan to crack down on safe havens that Haqqani and other networks have used to carry out attacks in Afghanistan. Was this issue raised again today by Mr. Kerry? And what is Pakistan actually prepared to do, and would Pakistan be prepared to do more about the safe havens if the United States would commit to reducing its drone strikes? Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, Michael, let me just say that I – of course, we talked about this issue today. Pakistan has been very helpful with respect to this process and we’re very grateful to the Pakistanis for their initiative, and they will continue to be helpful.

I disagree that I think the NATO mission will end before – I mean, look, if the talks are going to take place, they’re going to take place. If they don’t, that’s their choice, but it will not change the fundamental strategy of what the United States and Afghanistan and the ISAF forces are doing. The President has made it clear that he will, at the appropriate time, be announcing an ongoing American presence. And the negotiations on a bilateral security agreement are underway and I am confident will be completed at an appropriate moment in time. And our plans continue for an election in Afghanistan in 2014 that will be the centerpiece of this transition. The Afghan forces this year, without regard to what happens with the Taliban, have taken over lead responsibility in Afghanistan for security. We are working with them. And so that will continue, obviously, into next year, and the training and equipping will continue beyond that.

So the reason we hope the talks can take place is because everybody understands that a political resolution is better than continued fighting. And our hopes are that it would be possible to be able to combine that with the rest of the transition that is taking place in Afghanistan. We will continue those efforts, but it doesn’t – I don’t agree that there is a lack of synchronization between the military strategy and the diplomatic strategy. The diplomatic strategy is to try to get to talks but to continue the process of preparing the Afghan people for their election and for a transition that will take place regardless.

MR. AZIZ: Well, what can Pakistan do? I think as Secretary Kerry said, it is a process between the Afghan stakeholders and we are doing our best to facilitate that process. We can’t do more than facilitate. And obviously, there are many stakeholders, and Taliban have not so far been persuaded to talk to Karzai directly, but they may be persuaded to talk to the High Peace Council under certain conditions. So that is the next effort that is being made. And if they do, then at least they can talk about talks and how to organize them. But I think in these efforts what President Karzai will be coming here later this month, so we’ll explore with him also how much flexibility he will show in dealing with this issue, and hopefully after that some new attempt can be made.

On the safe havens, of course, we had a very detailed discussion with our plans, on our overall comprehensive strategy, the All Parties Conference that we are planning to hold, and how the follow-up will take place. And as it unfolds, all of you will come to know how we propose to deal with it. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Mr. Asif Bhatti of Geo Television.

QUESTION: Thank you very much. I have a question to His Excellency, Senator John Kerry. As advisor mentioned that we have reservations on drone attacks, so you might know about the public reservations and sentiments on the drone attacks. And the Pakistani Government especially criticizing these attacks and they think that it should be stopped now. What is your strategy? Are you seriously thinking to change your drone attack policy?

And the second part of my question is that are you considering the swapped deal of prisoners with Pakistan and especially handing over Dr. Aafia Siddiqui to Pakistan? Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Say the last part again? I’m sorry.

QUESTION: Secretary, there’s a – are you considering seriously that there will be exchange of prisoners deal between Pakistan and United States, and will you hand over Dr. Aafia Siddiqui to Pakistan?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, I don’t have any comment or anything to add with respect to any potential prisoner exchange or non-exchange. It’s just we didn’t even talk about that at this point this morning.

With respect to the drone policy, we’ve had an ongoing dialogue with our friends in Pakistan regarding all aspects of our relationship, our shared interests, including, obviously, the counterterrorism cooperation. And I think the President of the United States made it very, very clear recently in a major speech that he delivered at our National Defense University in which he laid out the legal and the policy standards that guide any actions that we have against any individuals with respect to terror and under what circumstances we might take direct action.

That stands on its own. That is a very clear articulation of our policy and of what it – where it will go. But we obviously don’t discuss publicly every aspect of our counterterrorism activities. I will say this, I’ll quote the President: “We must define our effort not as a boundless global war on terror, but rather as a series of persistent, targeted efforts to dismantle specific networks of violent extremists that threaten America.”

I know there are issues of sovereignty that are raised often. I would simply remind all of our friends that somebody like an al-Qaida leader like al-Zawahiri is violating the sovereignty of this country. And when they attack people in mosques and blow up people in villages and in marketplaces, they are violating the sovereignty of the country.

So I think the President has made a policy as limited and as clear as is humanly possible, and he has laid out a very transparent, accountable, thorough legal justification for any counterterror policies the United States may or may not engage in.

QUESTION: Do you have any --

MODERATOR: Deb Riechmann of Associated Press.

QUESTION: Thank you. Mr. Aziz, on the drone attacks, is Pakistan – the number of drone attacks has recently declined. Is Pakistan still asking for a further curtailment of these strikes that are so unpopular in your country?

And Secretary Kerry, back on the bilateral security agreement issue, there’s an unnamed State Department official that’s been quoted as saying that the U.S. has resolved most of the issues on the BSA and that is nearing completion on the agreement with Afghanistan. And right now, you’re running up against the one-year deadline on those negotiations and the troop level decision is hinged on this. Where do we stand on this? Are you guys about ready to wrap this up or are we, as Karzai said, still not talking about this, or – there’s even reports that you’ve read a completed text on this.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, I’m not going to comment on an agreement that hasn’t been finalized. It’s always dangerous to predict completion prior to completion. So we’re making progress. We’re working on it. I am personally confident that we will have an agreement and the agreement will be timely, and I am confident that the President has ample space here within which to make any decisions he wants to make regarding the future troop levels. So I think we’re on a good track. I feel very comfortable with where we are. And as I say to you, I expect this agreement to be completed at an appropriate time.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) you expect it?

SECRETARY KERRY: I expect it to be completed at an appropriate time.

QUESTION: Secretary Kerry, (inaudible) both questions --

MODERATOR: Mr. Baqir Sajjad of Dawn newspaper, a question.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) on both questions (inaudible) --

QUESTION: (Inaudible) regards to (inaudible).

QUESTION: Sir, do you have any (inaudible)?

QUESTION: (Inaudible) answer to the question that we --

MR. AZIZ: Yes, the question about drones. As I mentioned, we have registered our concern and will continue to do so that drone attacks are counterproductive in terms of our relationship (inaudible). So in the light of today’s discussion we’ll continue this dialogue on how to stop this policy of drone attacks as far as the U.S. is concerned.

QUESTION: Have you asked for curtailment?

MR. AZIZ: We are – no, we are (inaudible) stopping, not just containment. (Laughter.)

MODERATOR: Mr. Baqir Sajjad of Dawn newspaper.

QUESTION: Sir, you mentioned that you took up the issue of cross-border insurgency. Are you confident that Pakistan, which has not moved on safe havens on its side of the border, will do it this time?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, I’m confident that we’re working in good faith to find ways to go forward and find the best policy that we can put in place. We talked for a number of hours this morning and we covered an enormous amount of topics, and a couple of them it was important for me to cover very closely and very specifically. So we began to scratch the surface of some of this. I’ll be meeting again later this evening. I’m going to have further meetings, and this afternoon, and we agreed precisely because of the complexity of working out the details that we’re going to begin the Strategic Dialogue immediately. And over the six months, we will have a ministerial, but we have five committees that will begin to meet very quickly on this. So I expect a lot of definition and a lot of progress to come to the forefront.

What was important today was that there was a determination by the United States and by Pakistan to move this relationship to the full partnership that it ought to be and to find the ways to deal with these individual issues that have been irritants over the course of the past years. And I believe that the Prime Minister is serious about doing that. I know that President Obama is also, which is why the President looks forward to meeting with the Prime Minister in about a month or so in the United States. So this conversation will continue, and I’m confident we’re going to find effective ways to manage the challenges that we both face.

MODERATOR: Ms. Saima Mohsin of CNN.

QUESTION: Thank you. He’s introduced me already. My first question is for Sartaj Aziz. There’s a lot of talk about safe havens in Pakistan, and the United States in the past few years has put a lot of pressure on Pakistan to deal with it, but that hasn’t happened. With the new government – and it seems that the military is keen to do so as it did with Swat, but not without the backing of the government – is the government looking at this, and are you planning on doing something about it and sending in a military operation in Waziristan?

And for Secretary of State Kerry and looking ahead to troop withdrawal in Afghanistan and this relationship with Pakistan, Afghanistan, and the United States, there seems to be a huge upsurge in violence and a lot of concern about what’s going to happen come 2014. And we’re already seeing violence, as I said. So you mentioned monitoring the border, but what do you think you can achieve that you haven’t managed to in the past decade?

MR. AZIZ: Well, on the first question, as you know, this operation started in 2009, and out of seven agencies in the tribal areas, six we have already launched military operation and tried to gain effective control and establish the right of the state. The only agency left is now Waziristan. And obviously, with 150,000 troops deployed in the tribal areas, we are overstretched right now. And therefore, right now, we are planning to have an All Parties Conference in which we consult all the stakeholders. Obviously, dialogue has to go along with military action, so we will explore that option first. And if that doesn’t work, then we’ll see under what conditions and by what timeframe we’ll do the alternative actions.

So I think basically, partly it’s a question of capacity, partly it’s a question of timing, and the other options without which the basic objectives cannot be achieved. So in the coming weeks, you’ll know how the strategy works.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, let me be very clear. The United States is drawing down, not withdrawing. There’s a distinction. The President will announce the number of forces that he will commit for the United States, and other countries have already committed certain numbers of forces who will remain in Afghanistan for two purposes: one, counterterrorism; and two, to train, equip, and advise the armed forces.

Together, all of these countries, over 50 nations – about 52, 53 nations – have combined to help train and equip a military of 350,000 people in Afghanistan. That’s a very sizable army. And I believe, properly trained and equipped as they will continue to be over the course of the next year and beyond, they will have an ability to be able to cooperate, hopefully, with the Pakistanis and others in order to provide the kind of security and protection that the people of Afghanistan and the people of Pakistan deserve.

So I am very hopeful that as we go forward here, people will remember that this is a transition, not an ending. It is a transition to Afghans themselves who will stand up and fight for the freedoms that they want and for the lifestyle they want and for the country that they want. And I believe that as in other places in the world, when people are given the ability and the capacity to be able to fight for their own future, they do.

So I think we’re going to see an important transition take place, and if we work out modalities between us that begin to deal with some of these issues with respect to the borders and safe havens and other things, which I think we can work out, that will only strengthen the effort going forward. So I think this is a very important year, and not – and I think most importantly, a year with the opportunity for the people of Afghanistan to choose their future leadership in the spring of next year.

I think we’ve got to wrap up in a moment, don’t we?

MODERATOR: One question, please.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, I’m afraid if it’s one, it’s ten, and then I’m going to be late. (Laughter.) So bear with me. I’m sorry, folks. Thank you.

MR. AZIZ: Thank you very much.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thanks so much.